Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Jeremiah 40:5

Now while he was not yet gone back, [he said], Go back also to Gedaliah the son of Ahikam the son of Shaphan, whom the king of Babylon hath made governor over the cities of Judah, and dwell with him among the people: or go wheresoever it seemeth convenient unto thee to go. So the captain of the guard gave him victuals and a reward, and let him go.

Now while he was not yet gone back – Most modern commentators render And as he yet answered nothing, Return then, he said, to Gedaliah …

Victuals – A ration of food.

A reward – A present.

Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible

Verse 5. Go back also to Gedaliah] If thou wilt stay in thy own land, thou hadst best put thyself under the protection of thy countryman Gedaliah, whom the King of Babylon has made governor of the land.

Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible

While he was not yet gone back: it is not much material whether we interpret the he here mentioned of Jeremiah or Gedaliah. If we interpret it of Jeremiah, the sense is, that before Jeremiah was gone out of the presence of Nebuzar-adan, he, either by his silence, or by some declaration of his mind that is not here recorded, declaring that he was more inclined to stay in his own country, Nebuzaradan bid him,

Go back, & c. If we understand it of Gedaliah, the sense must be, Because Gedaliah is not to come back any more to me, go thou to him, &c. We read that the king of Babylon left Gedaliah as his viceroy or deputy in Judah. What he was, more than the son of Ahikam. and grandchild of Shaphan, the Scripture tells us not, only that he was left by the king of Babylon as ruler over the people he thought fit to leave, 2Ki 25:22; probably he was one of them who, during the siege, had gone out to the king of Babylon: to him the captain of the guard directeth the prophet, but gives him liberty to dwell where he pleaseth; so sends him away with victuals and a reward. It is more than probable that the king of Babylon had heard from some of the Jews, who, during the siege, had made an escape to his army, that the scope of the prophets prophecies were for the delivery of the city, and the Jews submission to him, as was before said.

Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole

5. while he was not yet gonebackparenthetical. When Jeremiah hesitated whether it would bebest for him to go, Nebuzara-dan proceeded to say, “Go, then,to Gedaliah,” (not as English Version, “Go back,also“), if thou preferrest (as Nebuzara-dan inferred fromJeremiah’s hesitancy) to stop here rather than go with me.

victuals (Isa33:16).

rewardrather, “apresent.” This must have been a seasonable relief to theprophet, who probably lost his all in the siege.

Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible

Now while he was not yet gone back, [he said], go back also to Gedaliah,…. These words, by different versions, are made difficult to be understood, both, whose words they are, and of whom they are spoken. Jarchi makes them to be words of God, and the sense this,

“and by all this he (Jeremiah) had no mind to return; and God said to him, go back to Gedaliah.”

According to the Targum, they are the words of Nebuzaradan, which paraphrases them thus;

“if thou wilt not return (that is, with him to Babylon, or rather to Jerusalem, or best to his own native place), or if thou wilt not dwell (that is, in this place), go back to Gedaliah.”

But of whom they are spoken interpreters differ. Some say of Zedekiah, as Cocceius; while he (Zedekiah) does not return, that is, to Jerusalem; which possibly he might, though as yet not determined by the king of Babylon; in the mean while is bid to go to Gedaliah, appointed governor. Others of Gedaliah, thus, while he (Gedaliah) does not return, but stays at Mizpah, go to him thither. Though it seems best to understand it of Jeremiah, who, having had leave from the captain, did not immediately set out anywhere; but, seething to be at a loss which way to go, Nebuzaradan gives him his advice; that seeing he did not care to go to Babylon, that he would go to Gedaliah

the son of, Ahikam the son of Shaphan, whom the king of Babylon had made governor over all the cities of Judah, and dwell with him among the people; this was one of the princes of Judah, who, during the siege, went over to the Chaldeans, and who was in great esteem with them; and being, no doubt, recommended to the king of Babylon by his generals, he made him governor of the land under him:

or go wherever it seemeth convenient unto thee to go; though he gave him his advice, he did not press it, but left him at full liberty to take his own way, and go into what part of the land he pleased, and settle in it:

so the captain of the guard gave him victuals, and a reward, and let him go; the prophet was just come out of prison, and destitute of the necessaries of life, and the land was laid waste by the enemy; and therefore he could not have subsisted without a supply, which was liberally given by the captain; not only food for present refreshment, and sufficient for his journey, which way soever he took, but a present of money or clothes, or both; which was very kind usage of a prophet by a Heathen officer.

Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible

Jeremiah goes on with the same discourse, that Nebuzar-adan dealt bountifully with him, and permitted him to go wherever he wished. We hence conclude that Nebuchadnezzar was fully convinced of the honesty and uprightness of Jeremiah. For he knew how he was regarded among his own people, and that he might rouse great disturbances, except he was upright and quiet. As, then, Nebuchadnezzar had no doubt respecting’ the character of Jeremiah, he wished to grant him free liberty to choose his own habitation in any city he pleased, or to remove wherever it seemed good to him. Invitation was given him to go to Babylon, and a promise of favor was added; but it was further permitted to him to remain in his own country.

I have said that this was done according to the divine purpose, that the Prophet might give a proof of his religion. For if he had gone to Chaldea, it might have been that the confidence of many would have failed them, and that faith in the promises would have vanished: for they might have thought it a sign of hopeless despair, had the Prophet gone there. That he might not then disturb weak minds, he thought it his duty to remain in his own country. And hence God inclined the mind of Nebuchadnezzar and the minds of his leaders to grant liberty to the holy Prophet to remain in Judea, as though for the purpose of raising a standard for the captives, and of accomplishing their return after seventy years. We shall, however, see presently that he was led away elsewhere; but that in no degree frustrated his prophecies, because violent men led him away as a captive, and he at length died in Egypt. But he did not willingly remove from Judea, though he found there nothing but grief and sorrow; for he did not gratify himself, nor could he indulge in any pleasures, in the abundance of meat and drink, but he was ever lamenting the overthrow of his own nation, and especially the destruction of the Temple. As, then, he preferred Judea to all other countries, and submitted to be a constant spectator of so many miseries, he gave a remarkable proof of his faith and patience, and thus strengthened the faith of the miserable exiles, so that they might know that God would be yet merciful and propitious to his people.

He goes on with the words of Nebuzaradan, but he introduces this clause, He was not yet gone back, that is, because he was not yet gone back. Then Nebuzaradan said, “Return to Gedaliah, that is, if thou preferrest to live here rather than to follow me, then go to Gedaliah.” Here Nebuzaradan shews how he would have Jeremiah to live in safety in that land, which was as yet like a den of robbers, even that he should be with Gedaliab. And we see how solicitous Nebuzaradan was to preserve the life of the Prophet, for he wished that Gedaliah should be his guardian, as he had briefly said before; but he now sets the matter more fully and more at large before him, Return, he says, to Gedaliah, whom the king of Babylon hath set over the cities of Judah, and dwell with him he intimates that Jeremiah would be without danger if he dwelt with Gedaliah, because he had been set over Judah by the king of Babylon. Repeated at the same time is what we have before observed, that it was in the Prophet’s power, either to go to Gedaliah or to go anywhere else; Whatever place, he says, it seems right in thine eyes to go to, go there He did not then assign to him any certain place, but gave him leave to go anywhere; so that the Prophet was to choose for himself an habitation either in Judea or out of Judea.

It follows, that he gave him food; for so I render the ארחה , areche, though some, “a present;” but it means food, as we shall hereafter see in the fifty-first chapter, where Jeremiah speaks of daily bread. The second word, משאה, meshae, I regard as meaning a gift or a present. Then Nebuzaradan bestowed on God’s servant food and other gifts. As to food, the Prophet might have well accepted it, for after the city was taken we know that he must have been in want of everything. Even before, he lived very scantily and miserably, having only a piece of bread daily. And now, when Nebuzaradan supplied him with food, there was no reason why the holy man should not in such want receive what was given him. But as to the presents, Jeremiah may seem to have forgotten himself; for it was a disgrace to him to receive from an enemy of God’s people, a present or gifts for his doctrine; for whence proceeded this benevolence and bounty to the Prophet, except that Nebuzaradan knew that his prophecy referred to the destruction of his own nation? It seems, then, that for this reason he wished to reward the holy man; he ought then to have refused these presents. But it is probable that he was not enriched by a large sum of money, or by costly things; Nebuzaradan only gave him some token of benevolence; and the Prophet might without suspicion have received the present, not as a reward for his doctrine, but rather as a confirmation of it offered by God, because the Jews had been enemies to him as long as he had been faithfully spending his labors among them; for when he bitterly reproved them, he had no other object but to secure their safety. But as he had been so inhumanely treated by the Jews, God intended that more humanity should be shown to him by a heathen and barbarous nation than by the children of Abraham, who boasted that they were the holy people of God. It was, then, for this reason that Jeremiah received gifts from the hand of Nebuzaradan. It follows, —

Fuente: Calvin’s Complete Commentary

(5) Go back also to Gedaliah the son of Ahikam.The captain of the guard seems to have felt, on second thoughts, possibly after hearing the prophets unrecorded answer, that he had not taken sufficient precaution for Jeremiahs safety, and therefore consigns him once more to the care of his friend and protector. On parting with him he treats him as an honoured guest, sends him a portion of food from his own table (comp. Jer. 52:34)a welcome gift, doubtless, after the privations of the siegeand an honorarium, in money as a compensation for the sufferings he had undergone as a preacher of submission to the conqueror.

Governor over the cities of Judah.The official title is significant. Jerusalem is treated as if it had been blotted from the face of the earth, and required no superintendence. Gedaliah, the prophets friend, had obviously acted on his counsels, and accepted the sovereignty of Nebuchadnezzar as being for the time the ordinance of God. A true patriot might well hold it to be his duty at such a time to accept office under the conqueror, in the hope of being able to do something for the remnant of the nation that was left under his charge.

Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)

5. While he was not yet gone back While he hesitated. But the original here is an unsolved enigma, so that many boldly say it is impossible to understand it, it is undoubtedly corrupt. But this is too strong. The sense may be, and as he yet answered nothing.

Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments